Tadalafil once daily in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms ( <scp>LUTS</scp> ) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia ( <scp>BPH</scp> ) in men without erectile dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of tadalafil once daily on lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH-LUTS) in men without erectile dysfunction (ED). To compare these with effects in men with ED. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After a 4-week washout period and 4-week placebo run-in period, 1089 men without ED (n = 338) and with ED (n = 751) were randomly assigned to placebo or tadalafil 5 mg once daily for 12 weeks in three global clinical studies with similar designs. In the pooled dataset, post hoc analyses of covariance assessed the impact and severity of BPH-LUTS using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the BPH Impact Index (BII) and IPSS quality-of-life (IPSS-QoL) subscores. Safety was assessed using treatment-emergent adverse events. The treatment-by-ED-status interaction was used to assess efficacy differences between the with/without ED subgroups. RESULTS: Men without ED were similar in BPH-LUTS severity/previous therapy to men with ED. Tadalafil significantly reduced BPH-LUTS from baseline when compared with placebo in men without ED (IPSS -5.4 vs -3.3, P < 0.01; IPSS voiding subscore -3.5 vs -2.0, P < 0.01; IPSS storage subscore -1.9 vs -1.3, P < 0.05). Tadalafil also significantly improved quality of life from baseline when compared with placebo in men without ED (IPSS-QoL -1.0 vs -0.7, BII -1.4 vs -1.0; both P < 0.05). Between-ED-subgroup interactions were not significant (all P > 0.68). Tadalafil was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Tadalafil 5 mg once daily improved BPH-LUTS in men without ED by a magnitude similar to that observed in men with ED. The adverse event profile in men without ED was consistent with that observed in men with ED.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".